I have downloaded Hi Res audio and then burned them on CDR. This CDR sounds better than the original CD.
So youâve downsampled some Hires material to 16/44 and put it on a CDR. It could be a different master to the original CD.
Hi Res Edition (google it) is one of the biggest, but one of the HiFi mags (I think itâs Hi Fi News, but they all blend into one for me) analyses new releases and often publishes graphs showing that, for example, a 192kHz release doesnât actually contain anything above 24kHz so is just a native 48kHz recording.
Mark
UHQCD format by Inakustik is a quality cd which reveals up to 100khz and you can definately tell when you hear the recording as itâs much much more dynamically expressive and ultra-realistic. Itâs called Telarc a spectacular sound experience and there are currently 2 volumes available. Caution must be observed when playing the cd as thereâs a chance of damaging your speakers if played at too high a volume.
Itâs just a 16/44 CD (Redbook)otherwise it wouldnât play on a CD player. 100kHz isnât possible.
Where has this mis-information come from?
I was intrigued. The In-Akustik website doesnât say anything like it, not even that the format is âby Inakustikâ:
UHQCD stands for Ultimate High Quality Compact Disc and is a development of the Japanese CD replication company Memory-Tech and the Audio Quality CD Company from Hong Kong. Unlike conventional CDs, UHQCDs are not pressed from polycarbonate but cast from a photopolymer and cured with UV light. To protect the softer photopolymer, a further layer of high-purity polycarbonate is applied as scratch-protection. The combination results in a significantly reduced reflection of the laser light inside the CD and an unmatched precise edge transitions between pits and lands of the CD. UHQCDs are 100% compatible with regular CD players. Musically, there is a sound image reminiscent of analog master tapes
Not that I believe any of that either. Itâs still the same 16/44 stream that goes into the DAC.
Turns out that you can find many hifi websites peddling UHQCD if you search for it, but none that I found made that incorrect frequency range claim
I am safe from 100 kHz killing my speakers with the 300 
1 Like
Have you heard of jean michel jarre and mike oldfield Amarok in HDCD.
The JMJ images cd album is 24bit digitally remastered utilising 96khz-24 bit technology by masterdisk new york. And it sounds quite good indeed and so does the M Oldfield amarok cd album but the cd cover has much less specifics reg re-mastering so i think it could be 20 bit only. I also have the Beachboys smiley smile and pet sounds remastered in the HDCD process.
About the Inakustik previous Telarc manufactured discs.
IN RED WRITING : CAUTION BEFORE PLAYING SEE PAGE 5
BEWARE! Jurassic launch contains sound effects at high levels with infrasonic frequencies to 5Hz. Damage could result to speakers or other components if this title is played back at excessively high levels.
I believe this to be true because dynamically it sounds on a different level than your standard red book cd. The sound effects have an ultra-realistic tone which are very knife sharp and expressive. Itâs almost uber-realistic!
A spectacular sound experience by Inakustik vol 2.
HDCDs required an HDCD player with a Pacific Microsonics chipset in order to be âdecodedâ otherwise they were slightly hobbled and not as good as a standard CD.
Why on earth would 5Hz audio be added to a CD? 
Well the HDCD cd i mentioned are a step above standard cd on my Yam cdp and quite a few players had the chipset installed Arcam being one maker, although iâve not seen one recently as itâs 20 year old tech.
The inakustik UHQCD is a cd which is manufactured differently than standard red book ones which brings it much closer to the original master and a much more realistic presentation of the music. For the dynamics of instruments!
1 Like
HDCDs decode to around 20 bit resolution, the sampling rate remains the same though at 44.1kHz.
The UHQCD is still a 16bit 44.1kHz CD though despite the advertising blurb.
Well they sure sound better than cd esp the JMJ images and M O Amarok, much more analogue sounding and relaxing to listen to. For a good explanation the inakustik web site gives a much more detailed exp of the tech involved in production of the UHQCD.
Iâd absolutely love for some ambient artists to re-record their classic albums in this method of cd, it would be a great listening joy!
1 Like
Jarreâs Images album was given a 96/24 remaster in the late 90s, but was (inevitably) downconverted to 16/44.1 for the CD release. It is a good-sounding disc, but youâre not listening to it in 96/24 quality if youâre listening to the CD.
The Jurassic Lunch track referred to above is from Telarcâs The Great Fantasy Adventure Album, a compilation of film music with extra effects added. Iâve got the red-book release and the 5Hz signals are fun to watch and feel, if your systemâs up to it. Telarc regularly put the warning about damaging equipment on their discs after several people did just that by playing the 1812 overture track too loudly.
Mark
1 Like
Why have you tasted the snake oil then? How much do you drink per night?
Listen for yourself and unless youâre deaf then youâll surely agree with me!
Maybe not quite what you meant, and apologies if someone has already mentioned it, but SHM-CD and Blu Spec 2 CD is worth checking out.
I have a few of both, and they do offer a âdifferentâ and or âbetterâ sound than the CD equivalents I have.
Style Council Long Hot Summer SHM-CD is fantastic.
Dylanâs Desire Blu Spec 2 CD, too. To name but two.
That said, the vast majority of the âhi-resâ silver discs that spin in a machine are SACD, Blu Ray Audio and DVD-a.
SHM-CD, as mentioned above, are plentiful on CD Japan.
1 Like
Second that. My favorite example are the most recent remasters of the post ABKCo Stones recordings, where the dynamic range has shrunk to as little as 4db on certain tracks. I have a 96/24 download of Some Girls, and it sounds just awful. My 1980s CD sounds much better. (As does my SHM-SACD. 
)
1 Like
Too much dynamics is not possible for people like me staying in urban house. I mostly listen to western classical music and because of high dynamic range cd, it is not possible to listen at constant volume. Soft passage I have turned the volume up and sudden high dynamics I have to run and turn down the volume as my Naim amp doesnt have remote. Listening at high volumes invites neighbours complaining to police and also it is injurious to the ears.
Listening to TCHAIKOVSKY 1812 cannon shots my friend blew up his speakers.
Itâs why i never listen at high volumes anyway on any cd as i just donât like loud music. I have my nait 5i-2 volume at approx 9 oclock maybe a tiny little more but not by much and this is loud enough for me if i had a detached house and larger room then iâd maybe listen now and again from 9.30 till ten. Ears are delicate things so look after them.
1 Like
Regarding the Stones ABKCO SACD remastered albums, I have bought most of these via Discogsâs over the last few months. They are absolutely awesome from a recording quality point-of-view. Not to mention the albums themselves.
I can play both formats (DSD and PCM) as they are hybrid disks and both are truly fantastic imo.
The studio put a lot of time and effort into these editions and it really shows when playing them.
1 Like
192KHz doesnât imply any content above 24KHz, but the music is sampled that frequency, potentially giving more accurate reconstruction of waveform and timing of very sharp rise sounds such as some percussion. Whether it makes an audible difference is another matter - some blind tests have suggested not, and from what Iâve read many people seem to feel it is more a matter of improved ambience than distinctly better sound quality. Of course comparisons are only valid between a mastering at the highest res, and copies downsampled from that - otherwise any difference in mastering is likely to be what is heard. And that, I suspect, is not infrequent - which would explain why sometimes the higher resolution version sounds inferior.
Music recorded at, say, 48kHz and upsampled to 192 of course will contain no more information tgan the 48kHz original - is that perhaps what the article was saying?
1 Like